In Rwanda, you toe the official line, or live and die a pauper or in exile

Christopher Kayumba 

By Christopher Kayumba

In Summary

• Since the founding of modern Rwanda, it hasn’t been prudent to be on the wrong side of the powers that be. Doing so has proven to be political suicide.
• Success has tended to be defined and measured in terms of one’s connection with political power. It doesn’t matter whether one is in private enterprise, academics; agriculture, the church or politics.

On February 8, 2013, President Paul Kagame delivered what can be termed a political bombshell to an expanded Rwanda Patriotic Front (RPF) Executive Committee.

Unexpectedly, he requested party faithful to discus and come up with a formula that would ensure “change, continuity and stability” in the years after his second constitutional term ends in 2017.

Following the call, there was excitement that RPF members would evidentially discuss the merits of a post-Kagame Rwanda and come up with actionable recommendations to move the country forward.


It was even expected that other political parties and actors would join in since a successful political transition is a national concern. This hasn’t been the case. Unsurprisingly, what has happened is that, instead of robust and informed debate, a dominant view has emerged.

This view, prevalent in the mainstream media fervently calls on President Kagame to seek a third term. This view treats politics as the domain of virtuous and visionary God-ordained men without whom, their societies are doomed.

Read: Now Rwanda’s transition hinges on amending law to keep Kagame

On the sidelines, a small alternative view also exists, expressed in hushed tones and on social media. It calls on the president to respect the constitution and retire at the end of his second constitutional term.

So what does this say about Rwanda and Rwandans?

About two weeks after the president issued the “political homework,” I bumped into a respected jurist in Kigali (who is also a key member of the ruling party). When I inquired after the progress of the debate on the “homework,” he informed me that not much was afoot.

He said the problem was that the “homework” lacked terms of reference.

This was surprising to me, because I thought the “homework” was straightforward. He said RPF members were not sure, for example, whether the “homework” also included discussing amending the constitution to allow for a third term or whether the president’s retirement was a foregone conclusion.

I reminded my friend that the president has, on more than once occasion in the past, been very clear that he intended to retire in 2017. He insisted that the past didn’t matter under the circumstances; it was important for the president to restate his position.

On reflection, my friend’s insight is significant and teaches us something about Rwanda and Rwandans.

Since the founding of modern Rwanda, it hasn’t been prudent to be on the wrong side of the powers that be. Doing so has proven to be political suicide.

And I offer three reasons for this:

First, because of land scarcity and the structure of the economy, it’s difficult to survive outside the influence of those with political power.